MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2399900422 · doi:10.1111/jocn.13322

Safe sleep, day and night: mothers' experiences regarding infant sleep safety

2016· article· en· W2399900422 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Annie Lau, Wendy A. Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Nursing · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver Coastal Health
FundersSchool of Nursing, University of British Columbia
KeywordsSudden infant death syndromeGrounded theorySleep (system call)Psychological interventionQualitative researchMedicinePsychologyNursingDevelopmental psychologyPediatricsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore Canadian mothers' experiences with infant sleep safety. BACKGROUND: Parents decide when, how and where to place their infants to sleep. It is anticipated that they will follow international Sudden Infant Death Syndrome prevention sleep safety guidelines. Limited evidence is available for how parents take up guidelines; no studies have explored Canadian mothers' experiences regarding infant sleep safety. DESIGN: An inductive qualitative descriptive study using some elements of grounded theory, including concurrent data collection and analysis and memoing. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews and constant comparative analysis were employed to explore infant sleep safety experiences of 14 Canadian mothers residing in Metro Vancouver. Data collection commenced in December 2012 and ended in July 2013. FINDINGS: The core theme, Infant Sleep Safety Cycle, represents a cyclical process encompassing sleep safety from the prenatal period to the first six months of infants' lives. The cyclical process includes five segments: mothers' expectations of sleep safety, their struggles with reality as opposed to maternal visions, modifications of expectations, provision of rationale for choices and shifts in mothers' views of infants' developmental capabilities. Mothers' experiences were influenced by four factors: perceptions of everyone's needs, familial influences, attitudes and judgments from outsiders and resource availability and accessibility. CONCLUSION: To manage infants' sleep, mothers reframed sleep safety guidelines and downplayed the risk of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome for all forms of sleep at all times. Healthcare providers can support mothers' efforts to manage their infants' sleep challenges. During prenatal and postpartum periods, providers' interventions can influence mothers' efforts to adhere to sleep safety principles. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The study findings support healthcare providers' efforts to assist mothers to modify expectations and develop strategies to support sleep safety principles while acknowledging their challenges.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical NursingSame topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleepFrench-language works237,207